Cynthia , Flesh Eating Synthetic Bacteria That Has Gone Wild .

I'm not the one who believes everything pseudoscientific sites post. I actually never believe any articles written by journalists or bloggers, I
always go to the original studies and analyze them myself.

In this case, the article you posted, talks about bacteria evolving into a pathogen by itself, without the input of Monsanto.

I read about it in the Virginia-Pilot newspaper during the oil spill ordeal. Unsure if it is man made or not. I am 50/50 on that one Agartha, because
I have no sources, like yourself. It was so long ago, maybe that info was in the arricle. I was thinking of backordering but that's like 30 papers
cause I have no idea which one it is and don't feel up to it. That's not my specialty.

I read about it in the Virginia-Pilot newspaper during the oil spill ordeal. Unsure if it is man made or not. I am 50/50 on that one Agartha, because
I have no sources, like yourself. It was so long ago, maybe that info was in the arricle. I was thinking of backordering but that's like 30 papers
cause I have no idea which one it is and don't feel up to it. That's not my specialty.

For decades scientists have pursued genetic modifications that might enhance these microbes' ability to chew up oil spills, whether on land or
sea. Even geneticist Craig Venter forecast such an application last week during the unveiling of the world's first synthetic cell, and one of the
first patents on a genetically engineered organism was a hydrocarbon-eating microbe, notes microbiologist Ronald Atlas of the University of
Louisville. But there are no signs of such organisms put to work outside the lab.

I dunno if we already see the signs by now. And there's this:

At this point, there are no man-made microbes that are more effective than naturally occurring ones at utilizing hydrocarbons.

The microbes eating the oils spilled in the Gulf were/are natural, not man made.

vs:

"Microbes are available now but they are not effective for the most part," says marine microbiologist Jay Grimes of the University of Southern
Mississippi. At this point, there are no man-made microbes that are more effective than naturally occurring ones at utilizing
hydrocarbons.

Man-made microbes in action, efficiency is the point they worried about at that time. One has to wonder why that story changed within a few years,
which is precisely why I brought it up.

But they never said anywhere that they have created microbes and used them in the Gulf to eat the oils spill. It's not secret they have been trying to
modify natural bacteria to make it more efficient, but they haven't been able to do so yet. And nowhere it says they have used man made microbes to
clean up the sea. I don't think the story have changed.

My original statement still stands: no 'man-made-oil-eating-bacteria' has been released in the ocean and has been modified into flesh eating. No
evidence of that at all.

Despite the scientific skepticism, MicroSorb's Baird remains confident that her company, through its tireless petitioning to state officials
and lawmakers in Washington, will win business in the Gulf. "We've had some dialogues with BP," she said, "and we remain very optimistic that we're
going to be utilized to clean up the Gulf. So much so that we've ramped up production." "This should really be taken seriously," Baird said, "and the
fact that it's not is a real problem."

For many of the entrepreneurs, patience was a must. The Massachusetts-based MicroSorb Environmental Solutions, which makes what it says is a
safe, hydrocarbon-eating microbe, reached out to BP in April, shortly after the spill began, to get its product into the Gulf. Last month, BP began
the first tests on some of the 200 microbe proposals it received, Rowe says.
"We said three months ago that (microbes) should be tested," says Billy Nungesser, the president of Plaquemines Parish, La., and a frequent BP critic.
"We're a day late and a dollar short," Nungesser says.

originally posted by: Agartha
Sorry, I don't see a conspiracy regarding a 'man-made-oil-eating-bacteria' that doesn't seem to have an origin in any lab. I have tried to find a link
with Cynthia but it doesn't seem to exist, and I am not the type who believes stuff without good evidence.

I managed to find this link for the J. Craig Venter Institute about one of their special projects. Interestingly one of the researchers on the project
is named Cynthia. Cynthia Andrews-Pfannkoch made the first important discoveries in the project. It never says what this bacteria is used for now or
who is using it.

"In 2003 Drs. Venter, Smith and Hutchison (along with JCVI's Cynthia Andrews-Pfannkoch) made the first significant strides in the development of a
synthetic genome by their work in assembling the 5,386 base pair bacteriophage ΦX174 (phi X). They did so using short, single strands of
synthetically produced, commercially available DNA (known as oligonucleotides) and using an adaptation of polymerase chain reaction (PCR), known as
polymerase cycle assembly (PCA), to build the phi X genome. The team produced the synthetic phi X in just 14 days."

I think this shows that the bacteria was in fact created at this intitute, not seeing any info that show it has mutated, or 'proof' it has affected
wildlife in the area.

I star your replies too, because you actually discuss the topic and never the poster and I appreciate that!
And because you end your posts with 'innit'. lol

Bioaugmentation does not mean genetically modified, it means adding more bacterial cultures to speed up a specific reaction (usually degradation of a
contaminant). Bioaugmentation is also known as the Oppenheimer formula (if you want to read more about it).

This is exactly what the Microsorb microbes are: a consortium of more than 100 species of bacteria.

It is a proprietary blend of nature’s most powerful oil eating microbes, harvested from some of the most extreme and oil prone environments
around the globe. With over one hundred billion microbes per gram, our formula ensures rapid remediation. Since our microbes are cultivated on Texas
sweet crude oil and Gulf of Mexico seawater as a food source, they are ideally suited for the Deepwater Horizon spill.

Thank you for that, but if you check page 2 somebody has already posted about the synthetic microbe. This bacterium has not been created to eat oil
and has never been released in the ocean. This bacterium has a genome which includes only the essential genes for survival and reproduction. With this
work they are trying to harness synthetic life, which would be a great topic to discuss but unfortunately it's got nothing to do with the OP.

When you read that 2/3rds of the oceans will be turned to blood and you read in real time

According to the University of the District of Columbia (UDC), up to 40% of the residents of the territories adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico
have become infected with severe respiratory and skin diseases, and one in four residents is planning to pack up and leave in the nearest future.
journal-neo.org...

you get the impression that this may actually have a direct relation to it . Oh
and you may have made that up but may be very close to the truth of the matter

The "report" that was linked is pretty much a fabrication. If you look at the links, you'll notice that they pretty much googled for a source as they
typed it and just lined that (the news story on the flesh-eating bacteria in the Gulf actually links to an older story with an entirely different
bacteria, for example.) I looked at several of the blogger's articles on this site (the person is described as an "expert" on the Middle East without
giving any real qualifications) and this style of reporting - not linking to hard data - is pretty typical.

MicroSorb says their microbes are cultivated only, that's right. Very good, so I searched for other players around and found this
Synthetic Genomics connection and more:

He also pointed out that right now the company’s proposal to select and introduce designer oil-eating microbes into the Gulf is in BP’s
hands. “It’s in their pipeline, but we are not waiting for a response. We know our approach stands the best chance to make bioremediation
work, and we are proceeding accordingly. ”

Research by the Berkeley Lab and others determined that indigenous microbes, including a previously unknown species, degraded the oil
plume to virtually undetectable levels within a few weeks after the damaged wellhead was sealed. Another study showed that the methane and other
gaseous compounds in the water column were also almost completely degraded within three months.

That's the thing, I don't see anything fishy. The bacteria eating the oil is natural. The flesh eating bacteria is natural. They have been trying for
at least 6 years to create a synthetic microbe and it's no secret....... what do you think is suspicious?

I think they released GMO microbes (not synthetics) during the clean up, a 'previously unknownd species' and thus a completely 'new form of
microbiology'. There's your possible connection to this recent hydrocarbon eating bacteria situation, which is precisely what some people from that
area believe to be the case.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.